Author: Jeremiah Penery
Date: 20:18:43 08/29/03
Go up one level in this thread
On August 29, 2003 at 22:19:59, Eugene Nalimov wrote: >Sorry, from SPEC Rate I see only that *independent* processes scales well. Any >OS with minimal NUMA knowledge will allocate data for each processor in its >local memory, thus totally avoiding such problems. > >And are you sure that NUMA system that for independent processes "scales almost >as well" as shared-bus shared-memory system is really good achievement? I used the words "nearly as well" without checking. In CINT Rate, Opteron (from what I could tell) at 1.8GHz scales at somewhere over 95% from 1 to 4 processors. Itanium2 scales at 97+% in IntRate. So Opteron is marginally worse here. In CFPRate, however, the situation is much different. Opteron scales (from different sets of numbers) still around 90%, while Itanium2 drops horrifically all the way to near 70% efficiency. Remember also that this is Itanium2 with good compiler support against first generation Opteron without even decent AMD64 compiler (GCC is not horrible, but ICC 32-bit is still much faster - PGO's compiler apparently blows goats for compiling SPEC for AMD64, see http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/insidespeccpu/insidespeccpu2000-opteron2.html ). However, compared to *every* other processor with submitted SPECRate scores, Opteron has better scores than every one except a couple of Itanium2 systems and a single Power4+ system (of systems up to 4 processors), and scales better than everything except those Itanium2 systems in CINTRate.
This page took 0.01 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.